Musings: Trade deadline eve

Michael Grabner could bring in a haul, but that’s irrelevant to the Rangers

– Washington really came out of nowhere to land Kevin Shattenkirk. And good for the Caps – just as the Rangers have been frenetically trying to capitalize on Henrik Lundqvist’s remaining years, Washington has been trying to finish the job with Alex Ovechkin. The Rangers were surely in this, but in the end they may prove to be smart allowing Washington to sacrifice future assets while still ultimately landing Shattenkirk this summer for another run next year. The reported cost of first- and second-round draft picks along with prospect Zach Sanford isn’t absurd, but clearly it was more than Jeff Gorton was comfortable paying. Kudos to him for drawing a line – now we’ll see if it all works out.

– The question is, do the Rangers now change their plans? The prevailing favorite just landed the highest impact player of the deadline. Is anyone in the Eastern Conference other than the Penguins confident enough they can go toe-to-toe with Washington that they want to splurge assets on mediocre talent? It might not be the most sensible arms race.

– I completely understand the logic of listening to offers for Michael Grabner and it’s true the Blueshirts could probably get a king’s ransom for the 26-goal scorer. But does that sound like the modus operandi for New York? Even with the Caps landing Shattenkirk New York is all-in, and will be until Henrik Lundqvist is gone. Teams would be offering prospects and picks for Grabner and that’s just not what the Blueshirts are looking for right now. Grabner has major trade value, but he’s also a critical piece to what’s a solid playoff team. I think it’s more likely the Rangers are looking for ways to keep Grabner in the fold for at least another season as his speed has really given the team another dimension. And if it’s looking inevitable that Grabner will end up in Las Vegas, then the Rangers might cash out in June for a lesser but still substantial package.

– Other than Shattenkirk, the trade targets I’ve been discussing over the last month (Michael Stone, Cody Franson, Dennis Wideman, Ryan Murphy, Dmitry Kulikov) have been extremely underwhelming. But as always happens during deadline week, some unexpected names have begun to circulate. There are now whispers that Carolina might deal Justin Faulk or Dallas might move John Klingberg. Neither of those is at all likely, but as Star Wars taught us – “there’s always a bigger fish.”

– I don’t think Larry Brooks’ report on Sunday is at all surprising – of course everyone wants J.T. Miller with the year he’s having. Miller can be had as anyone else can – but it’d be in a deal that immediately solves New York’s defensive woes with a cost controlled top pair D-man – and then some. I highly doubt anyone’s offering that.

– Obviously it’s hard to look ahead to the offseason with any clarity when we don’t know how this year will play out or even what will happen this week. But it seems like a good bet the Blueshirts will need to shave money off the cap and will be spending significant cash on a defensive makeover. That combined with expansion draft complications means New York will have some tough decisions to make. Presumably one of Grabner, Oscar Lindberg or Jesper Fast will be the Knights’ selection, but if the Rangers commit to revamping the defense, then using a Miller – or a more expensive contract like Derek Stepan or Rick Nash – as trade bait could create some fireworks while allowing the Blueshirts to keep another one of their depth forwards.

– Kevin Klein’s absence from the lineup over the weekend was apparently injury related, but Adam Clendening’s continued strong play has not gone unnoticed and assuming New York brings in external help, Klein appears to be the odd man out. I’d think he’s worth at least a third-round pick, if not a bit more given his affordable contract and additional year of term remaining.

– It seems as though the Ducks will play out the season before sorting out their issues on defense, but if I were Gorton, that would still be the team I’d be looking to poach from. Anaheim is doomed with expansion and has a comical number of good young defenders – a match shouldn’t be hard to find.

—Question time: 1) What would you expect back for Grabner if the Rangers did dangle him on the market? 2) Would you have matched the Capitals’ deal for Shattenkirk? 3) Who will ultimately be the newest Blueshirt(s) tomorrow?

"Musings: Trade deadline eve", 5 out of 5 based on 3 ratings.

Share this:

Related

28 comments

1) For Grabner Something a little better than Hanzal and Boyle. Maybe a 2nd and 3rd or a 2nd or 3rd and Josh Manson(wishful thinking)?
2) Would not and could not have matched that offer.
3) no one. There is nothing to compelling out there to give up much and it’s hard to see a big trade tomorrow.

I think we need to make a choice; either we are going for it or we are playing for next year. If we think we can compete with Pitt and Wash., then we go all in and move Grabber for a defenseman. If not, make a move that makes us better in the future. Standing still doesn’t help us.

I’d stick with Grabner, too fast, and having a great year for himself. It also would ruin our PK for us. If we can get a top flight right d-man, young, and cost controlled, disregard the first two sentences.

As we say in Brooklyn, No way Jose would I make the trade for Shatty that the Caps made. They also are very deep in their farm system, the Hershey Bears are a tough team, and has plenty of talent. You see, their management kept their #1’s, #2’s, and #3’s in the past, so they can be cavalier with this trade, while not sacrificing the future, because they have a deep bench already ……

Probably it’s Faulk, not my first choice, but a good man, or we stand pat, and go get ourselves eliminated in the first round.

Jeff, please don’t listen to all the calls for trades because the windows closing in on Hank, that’s carp, think long term !!!!!!!!!!!

1)For Grabs I would also add Pirri or Pumpel to get back Manson and a FWD who could help us Cramarossa, 4th line of Lindberg,Fast,Cramarossa. Bushvevish to the 3rd line
2) I would not match the Caps offer, WE probably sign him in the summer anyway
3)Hoping Manson, probably no one
4)If no Trade with Anaheim maybe Klein to Kings for Mcnabb or B. Smith for 3rd and a prospect (Gropp) forget Girardi or Staal being moved they are institutions here with Vigneault

Given the Duck’s cap crunch, Grabner would be a perfect candidate to send to a cap strapped ANA team in order to return us a coveted RD.

While it would not be fun to lose Grabner, he would serve as the quintessential blueprint in asset mgmt. Sign a 30 yo winger who needs a home for 2 years, in order to meet a quota for expansion draft requirements. Watch him score 30 goals in year 1, and before the draft flip him while his value is at it’s peak for that much needed young defenceman to a team who needs cheap scoring.

Even if he does eventually go LV in the draft, if it means we don’t lose the younger Lindberg or Fast, I am a happy camper and will consider the Grabner experiment a wild success.

You do not include Gropp in the Smith trade. Smith isn’t going to be resigned. It’s just be bad asset management. Hagelin becomes Etem and Gropp. Etem is back with Anaheim, though in the AHL, became Jensen (who’s not a NHLer) and a sixth round pick at this upcoming draft. So all we have left of Hagelin if that pick and Gropp. You trade Gropp for a rental, all Hagelin becomes is a sixth-round pick at this years draft…

1 – What date is the deadline?
2 – What does Shattenkirk going to Washington mean for our chances of getting him in July?
3 – Are any moves in the offing?
4 – How would making any trades now affect us in the expansion draft?
Yes I know that was four questions.

2. No change. Caps don’t have the space to keep him and all their pending free agents (Oshie, Alzner, J.Williams) so he looks to be a pure rental.

3. Not sure, but lots of rumblings. Duchene to the Isles looks like a real possibility, but it would cost them a boatload. Montreal has also asked about Vanek and Vancouver said they’re not done, so Ryan Miller and possibly Jannik Hansen will be on the move.

4. Depends on who we bring in. If it’s a rental such as Brendan Smith, I wouldn’t expect a change in strategy. If we like the guy, bring him back after expansion. If it’s someone who’s signed long term such as Vatanen, we’d have to convince Girardi to waive to be exposed or buy him out.

1. Deadline is wednesday at 3pm.
2. It doesnt mean anything, unless he signs an extension there which is unlikely with his asking price and the caps needs for room to sign other contracts.
3. If we make any move it is going to be for a low impact D man such as the one above. I am hoping for franson
4. It probably wouldnt because whoever we take on now is likely a rental. if we were to somehow trade for someone with significant value who has a number of years still on their contract (perhaps say, justin faulk) then we would need to make some serious moved to make sure they are protected.

1. I would not trade Grabner unless some team made an offer too awesome to refuse–like Trouba or someone as young and talented for Grabner and Peumple or Pirri. I might consider trading him for a low first round pick and a talented prospect…not a stumble bum, for only Grabner. It would have to be a quality offer to trade him in my view because he fits in the Rangers’ system so well.

2. I am heartened that my faith that Gorton would not get into a bidding war for a Shatty rental was confirmed. Would not have matched the Caps’ deal. They have a farm more stocked system than do the Rangers.

3. I think Gorton may make a modest improvement on the blue line. Maybe Smith.

The only way I would trade grabner is if I was getting a real good young defenseman. Grabner has been a perfect fit for this team and is great on the pk. I understand sometimes you sell high but I have to trust gorton knows what he’s doing. So far I like his moves

My brother and I were discussing the trade deadline and I told him that although this team is good, if there was interest in some of the Rangers’ older players where they could receive prospects and/or talented young players and first round picks for them, like for Nash, Grabner, Zucc, Klein, Staal, Girardi, Holden, and Stepan because of his impending NMC, I’d listen. The contrarian viewpoint here, to be sellers not buyers at the deadline has a lot going for it if they can make deals they can protect or will not have to protect from the draft. With all the good young players the Rangers have right now, adding to them could make them dynamite for years to come.

I doubt that will happen because this is the Rangers we are speaking about, but it is something I’d have no problem with at all.

You kind of speak out of both sides of your mouth when you praise the Caps making a deal for Shatty because the window with an elite Ovi is closing and mention the Hank window closing WHILE saying you wouldn’t have made a similar offer for Shatty.

Hey, AV is quite happy with the team he has now, so who are we to question the coach? 🙂 Play it out & see what happens. The Rangers need some good young D they can develop by giving them playing time. They need guys who can defend first, play tough on the boards with a good stick, and are positionally sound. Good D are very hard to find.

I stand pat, Shatty was the only needle mover that would not have cost a roster player. That is one of the main reasons I would have went for him besides seing if he fit here and was worth the UFA contract hes gonna get, if he is in their offseason plans. Now that hes off the table, I wait to address in the offseason by moving a forward for one of these younger guys that seem to be available.

Faulks name came up when being linked to Duchane, so even if they would move him in division its gonna cost alot. Side question, if they did get him how many times would we here about how he played at Wisconson while Mac was there?

Id also see if anyone is tempted by the pieces (not all of them) that could have been used to get Shattenkirk, to take Staal or Girardi at full price. A rebuild team with cap space may work.

You move him and get the best deal possible. I’d expect the deal to be a low level 2nd line/high end 3rd line forward or a 4th-6th defenseman and some draft picks. We need to sell high on Grabner now. We have three distinct problems in the organization:

1- Lack of defensive depth, particularly on the right side. Most of our defensive prospects are 2-3 years away and are considered projects as it is.
2- Lack of organization depth period. Our AHL team is loaded with borderline 3rd/4th line NHL players if everything breaks out perfect. There are a handful that might exceed that, but you can’t build a winning organization around “might”.
3- Lack of draft picks that has led to problems 1 and 2.

We’re not getting Jacob Trouba for Klein, Grabner, Pirri and Peumpel. We’re not getting anything of immediate value for our spare parts. Graber has HIGH value right now. It will never be higher. Move him now and address one or more of our three organization problem area’s. Waiting will diminish that return. We missed this boat with Kevin Klein.

There are other options out there. If you note, quite a few of the high quality high end defenseman and forwards are not coming from the Scandinavian region. There are players there that are unsigned, young and are playing in the style of game that the NHL is moving too. Get our scouts over there and find these hidden gems and start restocking the cupboard. Stop scouting, drafting, and signing these Western Canada lumbering Staal’s and Girardi type players that can’t keep up with where hockey is headed.

Grabner is a huge part of why the Rangers are having such a successful season and not because of the goal scoring. His speed plays better in the AV system than it would it most and I doubt opposing GMs are foolish enough to not see that. This isn’t fantasy sports where you trade high and fool an owner. In the end of he didn’t score another goal he remains a viable threat on the forecheck and PK. Trading him for picks means we are not going for it. Leave the forwards alone unless you get top 6 talent back and try to fix the D.